D&D (2024) Skeleton Entry and Stat Blocks from New Monster Manual

Posted by Christian Hoffer on Twitter, here's a third stat block from 2025's Monster Manual!

Also don't forget check out the ancient green dragon and the kuo-toa.

 

[Zaukrie]

It is interesting that they chose to make "being a skeleton" a weakness (vulnerability to bludgeoning) rather than a strength (resistance to piercing).

Interesting isn't the word I'd use....

 

[Reynard]

That’s been the case since at least 2014

Huh. Look at that. I was sure it had been resistance to piercing attacks. That's what I get for not checking before posting.

 

[grimmgoose]

eh not every monster is meant to be a grab bag of abilities.

That might be true, but your first set of monsters marketing to DMs should be exciting. Get me interested to run the damn thing.

The Green Dragon they showed off was cool, I'll grant you, but following that up with, "yep, bag of hit points with an attack" isn't exactly convincing me.

 

[dave2008]

Huh. Look at that. I was sure it had been resistance to piercing attacks. That's what I get for not checking before posting.

I do think resistance to piercing attacks makes some sense. I think I will add that to my skeletons.

 

[dave2008]

That might be true, but your first set of monsters marketing to DMs should be exciting. Get me interested to run the damn thing.

The Green Dragon they showed off was cool, I'll grant you, but following that up with, "yep, bag of hit points with an attack" isn't exactly convincing me.

what do you want a skeleton to do? It is a skeleton, I just want them to die quickly.

 

[Stalker0]

That might be true, but your first set of monsters marketing to DMs should be exciting. Get me interested to run the damn thing.

The Green Dragon they showed off was cool, I'll grant you, but following that up with, "yep, bag of hit points with an attack" isn't exactly convincing me.

This I can completely agree with. When I saw that I was going to be the skeleton as opposed to say…a beholder, I was definately disappointed!

 

[grimmgoose]

what do you want a skeleton to do? It is a skeleton, I just want them to die quickly.

Make them minions. Remove the health tracking part entirely. Makes them die even quicker.

Or, give it a 'mark' ability; if a single skeleton hits, all others gain Advantage if attacking the same creature. Makes them dangerous and interesting.

What I'm really saying is: 4E already solved this problem.

edit: my point though, is that it's fine if some monsters are simple. You should not market your MM with simple monsters. We've have simple monsters for 10 years. Show me that you've learned something this past decade on how to make monsters fun for the DM to run, and fun for the players to fight against.

 

[dave2008]

Make them minions. Remove the health tracking part entirely. Makes them die even quicker.

Or, give it a 'mark' ability; if a single skeleton hits, all others gain Advantage if attacking the same creature. Makes them dangerous and interesting.

What I'm really saying is: 4E already solved this problem.

Then play 4e? I mean 4e is a great game, it brought me back to D&D, but 5e is a different game. Just play the game you like.

I like 4e a lot, but I disagree it was the be all to end all of monster design. Many 5e monsters are as good or better than their 4e counterparts. I mean the 4e skeleton only had a melee attack, it was even simpler than the 5e version in that regard. It (4e) did have a passive bonus to OA that is interesting, but doesn't feel very skeletony to me. So 4e didn't solve this problem.

edit: my point though, is that it's fine if some monsters are simple. You should not market your MM with simple monsters. We've have simple monsters for 10 years. Show me that you've learned something this past decade on how to make monsters fun for the DM to run, and fun for the players to fight against.

I don'r care about that personally, but sure.

 

[grimmgoose]

Then play 4e? I mean 4e is a great game, it brought me back to D&D, but 5e is a different game. Just play the game you like.

I like 4e a lot, but I disagree it was the be all to end all of monster design. Many 5e monsters are as good or better than their 4e counterparts. I mean the 4e skeleton only had a melee attack, it was even simpler than the 5e version in that regard. It (4e) did have a passive bonus to OA that is interesting, but doesn't feel very skeletony to me. So 4e didn't solve this problem.

I love 4E. I also have an interest in that this game we love doesn't regress. Some of this is opinion - I'd be hard-pressed to find a 5E monster that is more interesting than their 4E counterpart, but that is fundamentally a matter of opinion.

I don'r care about that personally, but sure.

You don't care if 5E 2024 - a product that WOTC wants you to pay money for - is going to be better than 2014?

 

[Reynard]

I do think resistance to piercing attacks makes some sense. I think I will add that to my skeletons.

So I looked it up and in 3.x, they had Bludgeoning DR which means they were actually resistant to bludgeoning damage, and in AD&D they were resistant to slashing and piercing. Also in both cases they were immune to cold damage.